USAToday Attacks Roberts

Today as the Roberts hearings open, even the New Republic is calling on Dems not fight. But over at USA Today, there's a fangs-bared editorial that makes it sound like we're back at Day One of the Bork hearings.

Would Roberts, his 50-year-old former clerk, do likewise - either making it difficult for Congress to extend those gains, or even turning back the clock? His record leaves plenty of room for doubt.

Confirmation is not a given with this writer:

Nevertheless, his record bears close scrutiny - and his answers should go a long way toward determining whether he should be confirmed for a lifetime appointment as the nation's most powerful jurist, deciding issues barely imaginable today and influencing the lives of generations to come.

What's got USAT so upset? Here's a summary. You can feel the emotion by the writer's angry word selection, which I've highligted:

On privacy: In memos written when he was in the Reagan administration, Roberts disparaged the notion that there is a constitutional right to privacy that prevents the government from criminalizing contraception, abortion and gay sex.

On race: Roberts has belittled affirmative action as "recruiting of inadequately prepared candidates" and has argued for standards that would make it easier for school districts to evade desegregation orders.

On women's rights: Roberts ridiculed the concept that women are subject to workplace discrimination, and he argued for narrowing the government's ability to enforce the ban on gender discrimination in education.

It sounds almost like a sports score: "Indians disparage Twins, 12-4." How could such a winning, polite guy be so tough on housewives who just want to take the Pill, or a bright black kids who wants to get ahead?

Easy. It's that "the nominee is just too good" thing, that made #44 on my "Supreme Bias" list. As USAT puts it:

One has to wonder whether Roberts, who has led a cloistered career among the nation's legal elite, appreciates the obstacles faced by the less advantaged.

Does one really have to wonder such drivel? Just because a guy's smart and has done well doesn't mean he can't appreciate differences. I don't think the author would ever posit that someone who is less bright and less successful can't apprciate differences. And anyway, we all know that behind facades of success (even one as solid as Roberts') there are always difficulties and hardships.

Appreciating disadvantages does not always lead to throwing money at the disadvantaged, or scrapping the Constitution so they might feel better. Roberts, like many of us, believe the way out is not a dole, but learning and working -- and preserving the Constitution in the process.